Of all the unmitigated absurdities to force a populace into a state of prolonged
privation, just so those who are not suffering because they are in a position of
surplus, have their lives so regulated by a routine of expectation, they expect
others to abide by a similar plan of process, procedure and productivity, in terms
of a product return... in this instance, a loan. For all their assumed business
rationale of investing in that which appeared as a potentially profitable venture,
they come face to face with the reality of life... yet they want to retreat from
such a realization into the illusion of recompense and name this fantasy... Austerity.
Austerity is the monster of their contrived fairy tale, a monster that they do not
have to have any real, first-hand experience with, thus making the stories of those
having to suffer at the hands of such a monster, an allusion, an illusion that will
pass away and they can turn the pages to the next chapter, to the next story in
a book cataloging various tales of prone-to-failure economic policies.

Yet, let us be fair in our assessments of who has participated in creating one
or another Frankenstein. Then again, let us be equally fair in determining who is
responsible for perpetuating the viability, if not rumors thereof to the extent of
creating a living mythology. On the one hand it is not fair that people should be
subjected to measures of austerity over prolonged periods of time when imposed on
them by human factors such as creditors, but neither should the creditors be faulted
with sole blame if the people themselves have participated in the conditions which
directly contributed to the need for credit or an inability to repay a loan based
on personal disencentives to do so such as maintaining a black market type of
commerce that does not pay taxes, thereby contributing to debt. If a government
can not be trusted to tell the public the truth about its holdings and debts, and
the public participates in 'under the table' commercial activities which harm the
public coffers and debt, and creditors don't take these circumstances into
consideration before providing loans; we have a situation that may well perpetuate
itself into the next century.

When developed economic policies are projected reconstructions of childhood
fairy tales concealed by the language of business and adulthood, it is the main
characters, those who make up the few, the 1%, as a minority of those who make up
a cast of millions, that are to come out on top. But investors, these bankers,
these politicians, these business men and women are not insensitive. But they often
do not have to live the privations which accompany measures of austerity that the
people are cajoled, are manipulated, are persuasively motivated and even sometimes
forced to abide with. Those who call for the usage of Austerity Measures are quite
often far removed from the many forms of suffering individually experienced by a
public that wants to do the right thing, to pay back a debt, but do not want to
be subjected to a convoluted mentality once practiced by the British, which advanced
the rationale of a debtors prison. Prolonged austerity measures creates the unwarranted
social conditions of a populace subjected to a prison, that the sensibilities of
some within that prison, are provoked into feeling they have been thrust into a
dungeon and made subject to its horrors.

Those investors who ask for Austerity Measures, perhaps with a contrite and solemn
countenance, and those who must then try to sell their constituents on this proposal;
fail to account for the fact that those who are being "motivated" into accepting
such conditions, were not permitted to partake of a full partnership arrangement.
They did not make the investment deal that they are now being forced to yield up
a recompense for by prolonged unemployment, and by the many individual losses only
those suffering can fully describe with an intimacy of explanation. The social
contract has been broken. That which binds the govern and those who are governed
to participate in a coherent and complementary fashion has been rent in two. They
have suffered enough. Enough, is Enough, is Enough.

Austerity measures create a snowball effect when it produces risky economic
conditions making further investment a presumed exercise in futility. Investors
want to be safe. They have more than plenty resources to bide their time to await
more favorable conditions. And if conditions are not seen on the horizon as a naturally
recurring variation of social forces, they will then artificialize social conditions
to make them more amiable to investment, to one's hoarding interests. Yes, let us
contrive the idea of a European Union as a means of increasing the pool of money
that can be made available to those whose greed are like a child whose curiosity
is whetted with the anticipation of what the next (economic) story will unfold as
they turn the pages of a timeless activity which is allowed to prosper at the expense
of the many for a few. It is a modernized form of serfdom that they people are too
ignorant to perceive because they are affixed with the blinders of an indentured
servant with down cast eyes they have been conditioned into obligating themselves
to as an indication of respect for those with the most money... no matter what
methods and measures they use to get it.

And once the people are sold on the idea of a European Union based on a philosophy
of unity which professes a share and and share alike humanistic equality, let us
also encourage the usage of a single bank note, called the Euro, because the process
of exchange and rate-differentiated calculations detracts from the ability of those
who want to squeeze every penny from every piggy bank they can. Because the people
have been sold on the idea of paying enormous taxes to be provided for enhanced
social services, it's only right that investors take advantage of this communal
mindset by advancing further ideas of our inclinations to use economic forms of
Communism and Socialism to increase the likelihood of an accepted servitude which
will be defined as an Expression of Democracy, yet is anything but. Promoting the
idea that the people will enjoy a greater realization of Democracy is a gold mine
of opportunity to wield economic policies advancing a communal pooling of money
that, because of the existence of an illusory "social contract", the people will
oblige us various personal deprivations because the mentality of present Democratic
inferences is one of patriotism. The people will feel that it is their patriotic
duty to suffer, and if necessary, even to die so that the wealthy do not have to
suffer the dire consequences of losing a penny, when that which they invested is
contrasted to that which is still available to them.

The presumed "Social Contract" between the governed and those who govern is null
and void until such time as the people have acquired the status of being a full
partner, whose provisions thereof are contracted in a Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Those seeking to invest in any resource must go through the people. Without their
acceptance, no agreement will go forward, regardless if those in the presumed
governing authority says otherwise. All investments are risks, no matter how well
researched or how deep a person reaches into their "gut feeling". If a venture suffers
a loss, the loss must equally be suffered by all who are involved, and not have the
definition of that "equality of sufferance" defined solely by one partner. If investors
are not willing to take risks, without conditional guarantees that the people will
have to endure Austerity Measures, they should not be permitted either to invest,
or be involved in the business of making money or investment, in any way shape or
form... other than that which provides the commonality of subsistence the average
citizen obtains through employment. If necessary, they must be forced to relinquish
all their resources, as a measure of imposed "austerity" on them, except for that
which permits them to experience the same level of privation they expect others to
oblige them with. The age of the Robber Baron, in all forms, must come to an end.

The practice of designing Economic policies based on the underlying basic themes
portrayed in Fairy Tales or some other literary genre, must be stopped. The whole
of humanity must go beyond such nonsense. It is not that the basic intention of
a "Union" in Europe, Asia, Africa, South America or else-where/else-wise is wrong.
But good intentions fall short of expectations when self-indulging avarice is permitted
a foothold in decision making. You can not make a successful "Union of European
Countries" prosper for the people when it becomes insidiously equated with a dominant
notion of being an "Economic Union" (European Economic Community). An "Economic Union"
becomes a central clearing house which makes it easier for investors to spend as
little time and risk as possible, in pursuing their foremost interest, which is to
count ever higher stacks of resources whereby they can command others to do their
bidding; through various forms of attached persuasion. And yet, again, let it be
stated that the people themselves are not permitted to engage in the bidding process
as a full partner would thus be provided in any and all business transactions.
While the people are expected to bear the largest proportion of the burden, they
are not similarly permitted to share equally in the rewards of such a burden.
While a few do, most don't.

The "European Union" whose actual underlying practice is better stated with the
label of "Economic Union", pools the raw resources, the labour and accumulate wealth
to best advantage those few who can best take advantage of the accumulation because
of an alliance with the governing few who transact deals on behalf of the many who
have little say so in the business transaction. They are not permitted to say who
they want to do business with, how much they are willing to go into debt for, why
they would or should go into debt for, and what the terms of repayment are...
including whether or not some auxiliary method of payment is concealed in small
print which defines an unwarranted request to suffer the consequences of prolonged
Austerity Measures. Despite the names used to describe various associations of
different European neigbhors— with the initially sincere intentions for producing
a prosperous "common-wealth" as a prescription for an enhanced form of equality
through mutually beneficial trade agreements; the existence of government sanctioned
economic policies agreeing to the usage of "Austerity Measures", clearly indicates
this is an underlying separatist (egotistical) orientation that would better
serve the needs of the people if it were genuinely altruistic.

It is an irresponsible Democracy which promotes Austerity Measures on a populace
who never had an opportunity to fully, as an equal partner, transact the initial
formulation of a business deal. It is as ridiculous as forcing, with authoritative
forms of "persuasion", the entire population of school to pay the costs of replacing
destroyed or damaged property that was lost due to the actions of a few who decided
to engage in an activity without asking for permission. Granted, though the analogy
is crude, its intent suffices as an illustration that the whole of a population
should not be forced to endure one or another privation because of actions that
were taken by a few without the approval of those who are included in a conversation
as if they were actually present during a discussion and whose silence is taken as
a confirmation of approval.

Varying formulas of Irresponsible Democracy abound. Take for example the case
in America where the idea of a "social contract" is aligned with the notion of the
people having an "equal" share of governing ability by way of a voting process.
The United States, synonymously described as a "Union", hence a "Union of States",
"pools" its resources, pools its labor, and pools a proportion of the labored wealth
by way of taxes that can be used by governing authority to do whatever it wants...
so long as a majority of the authority are convinced of the propriety for doing so.
For example, in some places you will see the usage of collected taxes for the
construction of public recreation centers, and then the users of such centers are
required to pay an additional fee. If the collected fees do not meet operational
and maintenance costs, taxes can be raised for this or that fund, though the uses
of "creative accounting" methodologies for directing funds along this or that
alternative course, are not publicly shown. While there are those who claim that
the people can reject a tax proposal, a proposal can be adopted if only one person
votes in an agreement thereof, in an instance where they alone chose to vote. Using
the argument that the public is "fully vested" in making their Will known by way
of the voting box, a process that is generally felt to be worthless as evidenced
by an extremely poor percentage of people participating.

Political Authority does not care whether people advantage themselves of their
Right to "participate" in the governing process (like a cue-card directed television
studio audience)... an audience who has come to rightly believe that their vote is
meaningless. Even if the people vote against something, such as the rail system in
Salt Lake City, the governing Authority promote some necessity for disregarding the
Will of the People and go ahead with the project anyway. The people had no recourse
short of an outright rebellion, which they did not effect. In fact, Authority prefers
that most people don't vote, if the would vote against a politician's proposal. All
governing Authority needs under the present practice of Democracy is to have a dominant
percentage of participating voters say yes on a ballot form... whether the number
of participating votes is a million, thousand, hundred, ten or one person. This is
America in its practice of an Irresponsible Democracy.

Instead of insisting in the practice of a Democratic formula which enforces the
need of the public to be a fully vested, and equal partner in social governance
as the cornerstone of any and all economic practices, Authority chooses the most
irresponsible form of "Participatory Democracy" it can get away with... which has
resulted in the disgusting usage of "Austerity Measures" as if it were a logical
and viable plan. Ridiculous! The presumed "social contract" has been shredded by
those who govern and those that they, and not the people, chose to transact business
with under disgusting, and totally unacceptable conditions. But though such conditions
have placed the people into a spectrum of desperation, they still remain conserved
with the restraint of a desired civility. But they can not be held responsible for
a debt, that if totally paid in a proscribed time frame, leads to the digging of
a grave for one's country, one's people, one's self-respect. We can not tolerate
those whose self-interests to regain a measured allowance of that which they already
have an abundance of, is not tempered with unconditional restraint, we will have
no choice but to reclaim our rights of total sovereignty, until such time as an
honest "Union of European States" can be advanced without being commensurately
defined with a defining nickname as the "Economic Union of European States" through
which a few prosper at the expanse of the Many.

It is not the desire of a people to forego an interest in developing a unity
of peoples from different walks of life. For the planet Earth is very much smaller
these days. The deprivations and sorrows experienced by those whose lives were at
one time as distant as we of today may conceive of those in another galaxy, are
now realized, through a sincere empathy, as an expression of a more profound and
fuller humanity extended beyond the self-indulgent grasp of irresponsible economic
policies. If the people are to have a Union, and to profit as a sovereign people
evincing a Nationalist pride, all of us, must be entitled to a Unified Constitutionality
which mandates the entitlement of a fully vested partnership. There will be not illusory,
Urban Legend-like 'Social Contract' to be accepted as a document of rationality that
a few can use to take advantage of the Many, as if it were an actual, legal contract,
and yet be absolved from having to commit themselves from participating because there
is no actual way to enforce an agreement which has not real legal standing. The so
called "social contract" can no longer be used as a means to force the public in
obligating itself to accede to the requests of those who do not likewise have to
participate when expected to, under the same "social contract" agreement.

Though a government may advance the propriety of separating "Church and State",
as well as a "Separation of Powers" within its structure of Executive, Judicial
and Legislative divisions, however they may linguistically be demarcated with a
given culture; its reluctance to practice a separation of "Business
and State", giving rise to a host of sociological terms involving one or another
business-related orientation; is because such governments are attempting to do
entirely on its own, by way of a selectivity of players aligned with a preponderance
of political authority, instead of involving a greater majority, called the people,
who stand to loose more because they no readily available reserves of capital with
which to counter-balance unexpected economic turn -of- events which may be disfavorable.
Indeed, because the stakes are so high, it is the most minimalist of logical discourse
to increase the chances of profitability, if by no other means than to 'break even'
in a business deal, by having not only the voting power as might one sharing in a
full partnership, but by being a vocally proportioned decision maker as well as both
a developer and writer of the agreement to be contracted.

Though it may be difficult for some to conceive of the public's ability to engage
in the business-related political decisions for which they will be forced to abide
by the terms of such a contractual agreement, though they had no part in its actual
deliberated development... because the public has been socially trained over multiple
generations to denigrate its own conscience of mind and wherewithal abilities and thus
to think otherwise; the debilitating effects for which the public has, does, and
may will continue to suffer, provides a nakedness of truth that the present mentality
of economic policies can not, must not continue. It is a realization that the people
themselves must forcefully intercede on its own behalf to insist that such nonsense
will not continue. The mentality and its players must be segregated from ever being
able to participate in any economic venture whose verbal or written contractual
agreement is found to undermine or in any way diminish a Sovereign Peoples' Right
to establish economic stability and further its viability... but not at the cost
of the people themselves. If such an enhanced form of Sovereignty can only be procured
by a separatist form of Nationalism, then so be it, though a European Union form
of Nationalism, in terms of advancing a larger consciousness of one's humanity would
be preferable, is not mandated in a European Bill -of- Rights adopted by the various
peoples themselves.

But a desire for the adoption of a previously used separatist form of Nationalism
is not a regression. It is not a turning back of the clock promoted by some presupposed
"Good old Days" sentimentality. Because the people have come too far. They have seen
and experienced too much, accompanied by a commensurately developed fortitude, courage,
intelligence and wisdom. It is not that present conditions are bad, but that they
are miserably bad... which forces them into the consideration of taking a step back,
to catch their breath, when they are being asked to assume a second wind, to breech
what some refer to as an athletes "wall" of presently stamina.. at the very moment
privations are exhausting them. They are sick and tired of being made to feel guilty
in order to obligingly give more, as if subjected to an Oliver whose stomach is filled
with the insatiable hunger of a parasite yet their bowl is always full because they
have made others feel sorry for them. But the people have noting to be ashamed of.
They have done no wrong. They can no longer suffer the consequences of an indignity
imposed upon them through the many forms of disrespect engendered by a sustained
policy of Austerity Measures. If you want the people to suffer, than you must share
in the suffering equally. We The People must be free of this Debtor's Prison. When
a person has a debt, they work to pay it off. Likewise with a Community or a Nation.
We can not permit to be subjected to a servitude that will endure into future generations
and have our children, their children and their children's children grow up thinking
they are obligated... and that obligation can never be met, because the costs of
the debt mount due to an inherently designed structured to do so.

We The People have no desire to live in the past. We want the future. But it must
be a viable future. We can not tolerate the many forms of Irresponsible Democracy,
or Communism, or Socialism, or any other social and socio-economic plan of governance
to dictate the terms of how, when, where, by what means, and with whom we are to
pursue such a path; that is lined with a myriad form of individually sanctioned toll
booths which are permitted to dictate the required cost, required loss, and required
alternative recompense to be indulged in by the public— without the people having
any viable way of disputing unreasonable charges... in order to give the toll booth
operators a bonus on top of an already received lucrative salary and benefit package.
It truly is a modern day form of a Middle Ages formula for taking advantage of a
people whose collective power is marginalized by requiring it to advance its opinion
by way of a Revolt, Revolution or Rebellion. Such a requirement is but one of many
expressions of a practiced Irresponsible form of governance that seeks to keep the
people at bay by convincing them that such a collective opinion is an extremely
arduous process with little chance of success, and is therefore not worth the time
and effort. Yet, the people realize that such an effort of propaganda to dismiss
the viable utility of committing oneself to a Redirection of purpose than mere
subservience to the dictates of elected officials, must indeed have a great level
of promise for so much effort to be used in discounting it.

They seek to retreat to something more familiar, to a time
of presumed prosperity preceding such a time of desperation as they are now being
forced to endure, without either seeing the tally sheet or having had a part in
the initial agreement for which the tally sheet has been supposedly derived from.
Thus, by such a route are people led along a path of suspiciousness. They come to
neither trust in their political leadership or those who seek a recompense for an
investment that some people rightly consider to be invalidated, because of the
implied severity to which the public is subjected. No rational governing body would
force this upon their people unless everyone, all those involved in any form and
function, had to similarly suffer alongside with them. The people can not be held
responsible for the irrationality of those in authoritative governing positions, whose
electedness did not include the provision of being able to subject the people to
neurotically contrived business deals. The imposition of Austerity Measures is an
extension of this neurosis which is madness. It is an insanity which legally voids
those contracted agreements which would deliberately impose such privations on the
people.

When deals go bad amongst contractual agreements between varying authorities,
it is the people who are made to suffer. In peace or in war, it is the people forced
to endure privations. It is always the people who are forced to make amends, though
they may have little say so in the actual deal. It is not Authority or their agents
who suffer an equal share in the experienced privations of the people, for if they
would have to, no such Austerity Measures would be practiced. They do not suffer
the loss of a meal, the loss of employment, the loss of a vehicle, the loss of a
home, the loss of those amenities of socialization which are used to define one's
self-respect as a economically viable citizen. Authority indulges themselves
in creating their own permission to engage in economic agreements, that because of
the historically noted vagaries of the human condition, in that things do not always
turn out as expected; forget to likewise plan for the possibility of failure. Yet
none of those engaged in such ventures entertain loss because it is only the people,
those who are not permitted a fully vested partnership, and are forced to accepted
a vicarious "Representative" substitute; that will be able to acquire a small proportion
of pecuniary return if the deal turns out well, and yet assume total responsibility
for providing the largest proportion of recompensatory activity if a deal goes sour.
The contractual agreement incorporates a clause that those directly involved with
the deal, those who stand to reap the lion's share of the available gain, will not
have to experience an equal share of the loss.

The European Union, as is presently being practiced, forces its individual members
to individually suffer— though they are supposed to retain a collective consciousness
which makes them all more amiable and habituated to the ulterior motives of those
that want to take advantage of all that a collectivity, a "pooling" of resources
provides. They want all that is good, without having to assume any responsibility
for the occasion of some undesirable event, and to nonetheless be provided with a
stipend for being "inconvenienced" by social conditions which delay their desire for
increasing the yield of their wealth. Wide spread privations delineated as "Austerity
Measures", though debilitating to so many lives, is viewed as an an inconvenience that
they should additionally be compensated for, even when it was and is their plan which
failed to consider that an investment is a risk, and a risk necessarily comes with
the possibility of assuming a loss... without trying to machinate some retribution,
retaliation, or other remonstration in an attempt to procure some reimbursement
guaranteed by those who had not right to make a bargain which would cause the prolonged
suffering of so many. When it is obvious that the people can not speak coherently
for us, we must do so for ourselves.

In doing so for ourselves, we must demand a Cenocracy. (New Government) And with
such a demand comes the Cenocratic design of a full partnership agreement that is
Constitutionally mandated with an accompanying Bill -of- Rights provision.